Pieter Wuille [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2017-09-16 📝 Original message:On Sep 15, 2017 01:56, ...

📅 Original date posted:2017-09-16
📝 Original message:On Sep 15, 2017 01:56, "Thomas Voegtlin via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

Note 3: we could also use a bech32 format for the private key, if it is
going to be used with a bech32 address. I am not sure if such a format
has been proposed already.


I've been working on an "extended bech32" format with 12 character checksum
rather than 6, for private keys and other things that need stronger
protection. It would guarantee correcting 4 errors, where normal bech32 can
only detect (but not correct) 4.

The rationale is that in the case of an address, if an error is detected,
you can ask the receiver for a corrected version. As that option doesn't
exist for private keys you want something stronger.

This has been a low-priority thing for me, though, and the computation work
to find a good checksum is significant.

Cheers,

--
Pieter
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170916/e9b7ad89/attachment.html>;